You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The relationship between glial cell mechanosensitivity and foreign body reactions in the central nervous system
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Materials, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2014.01.038 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pouria Moshayedi, Gilbert Ng, Jessica C.F. Kwok, Giles S.H. Yeo, Clare E. Bryant, James W. Fawcett, Kristian Franze, Jochen Guck |
| Abstract |
Devices implanted into the body become encapsulated due to a foreign body reaction. In the central nervous system (CNS), this can lead to loss of functionality in electrodes used to treat disorders. Around CNS implants, glial cells are activated, undergo gliosis and ultimately encapsulate the electrodes. The primary cause of this reaction is unknown. Here we show that the mechanical mismatch between nervous tissue and electrodes activates glial cells. Both primary rat microglial cells and astrocytes responded to increasing the contact stiffness from physiological values (G' ∼ 100 Pa) to shear moduli G' ≥ 10 kPa by changes in morphology and upregulation of inflammatory genes and proteins. Upon implantation of composite foreign bodies into rat brains, foreign body reactions were significantly enhanced around their stiff portions in vivo. Our results indicate that CNS glial cells respond to mechanical cues, and suggest that adapting the surface stiffness of neural implants to that of nervous tissue could minimize adverse reactions and improve biocompatibility. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 418 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | <1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 408 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 121 | 29% |
| Researcher | 62 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 54 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 47 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 23 | 6% |
| Other | 42 | 10% |
| Unknown | 69 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 107 | 26% |
| Neuroscience | 65 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 49 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 27 | 6% |
| Materials Science | 23 | 6% |
| Other | 59 | 14% |
| Unknown | 88 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 63. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 March 2021.
All research outputs
#693,283
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Materials
#131
of 10,899 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,295
of 334,260 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Materials
#3
of 150 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,899 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,260 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 150 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.